CfE Implementation Group
Meeting of the CfE Implementation Group
The Inaugural meeting of the CfE Implementation Group was held on Friday 13 January 2012 at
10.30am in the Ash Room, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way,
Livingston, EH54 6GA.
Present:
Alan Armstrong, Member
Jackie Brock, Member
Ken Greer, Member
Terry Lanagan, Member
Karen McCallum, Member
John McCann, Member
Bill Maxwell, Chair
Gill Robinson, Member
Gill Stewart, Member
In attendance:
Catherine MacIntyre, Professional Adviser
Apologies:
Sandra Campbell, Programme Manager
1.
Welcome and Apologies
Bill welcomed everyone to the inaugural meeting of the Implementation Group. The
Group was reminded of the Management Board’s earlier decision that a smaller, more
focused group, was needed to take forward implementation of Curriculum for
Excellence. This meeting now signalled the beginning of the process of gradual
transition of responsibility from the Management Board to the Implementation Group.
The Management Board will, however, continue to have a key role at strategic policy
level.
Apologies were received from Sandra Campbell.
2.
Declaration of Interests
It was agreed that given the nature and purpose of the Implementation Group, it would
not be necessary to include this item on future agenda. Members did, however, take the
opportunity to discuss the Group’s operating principles and gave a commitment to work
collaboratively, through open and constructive discussion, and agreed collective
responsibility for any decisions and recommendations coming from the Group.
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
1
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
3.
Draft Role, Purpose and Constitution
3.1
Agreement of Functions
Noted 1:
Role
Clarification was sought about the role of the Implementation Group in
relation to governance vis a vis the Management Board. The Group noted
that the Programme Highlight Plan which is currently produced by the
Programme Manager and reviewed by the Management Board will, in
future, be considered in more detail by the Implementation Group. The
Management Board will then be given assurance by the Group that the
Programme is on track, that risks are being mitigated appropriately and
issues are being raised and acted upon. The Management Board would,
therefore, adopt a broader strategic approach and quality assurance role
going forward, whilst the Implementation Group will have the ability to
respond more quickly and directly.
Noted 2:
The Group accepted that there would be a period of transition which would
help to ensure that, going forward, there is no duplication of governance
responsibilities and reporting. However, the Management Board would
need to be reassured by the Implementation Group that progress towards
delivery of the Programme Plan is satisfactory.
Agreed 1:
The Group then discussed the detailed wording of this section and a
number of amendments were agreed.
Noted 1:
Agreed 1:
Agreed 1:
Noted 1:
Membership
It was noted that the Senior Accountable Officers Meetings (led by the
Programme Manager) will take place in between meetings of the
Implementation Group. Membership of both the SAOM and IG should be
for each member organisation to determine.
Functions
It was agreed that the outcome of the Post 16 Reform Programme should
be reflected within this section.
Accountabilities and Governance
The Group recognised that each member organisation had its own
governance arrangements and responsibilities. However, it was agreed
that,as group, it was important that there was collective responsibility.
It was also noted that members from ADES did not represent the individual
views of 32 local authorities but did represent the views of ADES as an
organisation speaking on behalf of authorities.
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
2
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
Noted 2:
Noted 1:
There was some discussion around responsibility for ensuring that the
principles of CfE were followed. This point was discussed more fully within
the context of the CfE Progress Report – Agenda Item 4.
Governance and Programme Management
The Group noted Bill’s intention to establish a small, discrete, programme
management function to support the Implementation Group which will
report directly to him and operate separately from Education Scotland’s
CfE programme delivery. This will ensure that clear separation is
maintained and that the ability to challenge is not compromised. This
structure was welcomed by the Group and it was agreed that it should be
added within the draft paper. Bill also confirmed that Sandra Campbell will
continue as Programme Manager.
Action 1:
Gill Robinson will amend the paper to include the intention to
establish a small, discrete, programme management function.
Noted 2:
There was discussion about the college sector’s representation and
contribution to, for example, the Senior Accountable Officers meeting.
Action 2:
It was agreed that Bill and Jackie would reflect on this, particularly
around the benefit of Scotland’s Colleges linking more formally with
SQA and Education Scotland in relation to the Senior Phase.
Relation to Management Board and Other Groups
Agreed 1:
CfE Communications Group
The creation of this group provides an opportunity for more targeted
communication with the education community and it would be important to
distill this down into a few really key messages. The Group agreed that
where change is successful, high level strategic messages are clear and
repeated.
NAR Governance Group
Noted 1:
It was confirmed that that this Group sits, as a project, within the CfE
Programme Plan and, therefore, reports are made through the programme
governance structures.
Action 1:
Gill Robinson will amend the draft paper to reflect this.
Noted 1:
Assessment Governing Group
Scottish Government is intending to refresh the current assessment
delivery plan and this is being discussed with partners. The revised plan
will be presented to the Implementation Group and, once approved, will
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
3
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
then be integrated within the overall CfE Programme Plan. The
Assessment Governing Group may, therefore, be stood down at some
stage in the future.
Agreed 1:
Noted 1:
It was agreed that once the plan has been shared with the Implementation
Group, a view can then be taken on whether or not specific College
representation would be helpful.
Appendix
There was discussion about the various stakeholder groups that have been
set up to support the implementation of CfE, including those set up at the
specific requests of Scottish Ministers.
Action 1:
Scottish Government colleagues are currently pulling together a list
of all the stakeholder groups. Once finalised,Jackie will circulate the
list to the Implementation Group for information.
Noted 2:
It was also suggested that the Implementation Group may wish to
undertake a review of the stakeholder groups.
Noted 3:
The Group noted that the Minister for Learning, Science and Scotland’s
Languages, Alasdair Allan, had expressed an interest in joining the
Implementation Group at a future meeting.
Appendix B
3.2
Noted 1:
It was suggested that it would be helpful to have an external review of the
Implementation Group’s operating and governance arrangements.
Agreed 1:
The Group supported this suggestion and it was agreed that this may best
be achieved by including the Implementation Group within the Gateway
Review process.
Action 1:
John will provide some further detail about Scotland’s College’s
responsibilities and reporting arrangements within Scottish
Government for inclusion within Appendix B.
Action 2:
Jackie will take steps to ensure that the Implementation Group’s
operating and governance arrangements are included within the
Gateway Review process.
Accountabilities and Escalations
Noted 1:
Detailed discussion of this item took place in the context of the Agreement
of Functions (Accountabilities and Governance) as noted above. The
diagram illustrating the escalation route was accepted.
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
4
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
3.3
4.
Progress Reporting against Programme Plan
Noted 1:
This point was considered during earlier discussion, 3.1 above, in relation
to the Role of the Group.
Agreed 1:
It was agreed that any further comments should be sent to Gill Robinson
as tracked changes on the draft paper.
Action 1:
Once all comments have been received, Gill will circulate a revised
draft of the paper to the Group for agreement.
Action 2:
Following agreement by the Group, Catherine will arrange for the
paper to be circulated to Management Board Members for information
and published on the website.
CfE Progress Report to Management Board – December 2011 Summary
Noted 1:
The Group noted the complicated process involved in producing such a
broadly-based and comprehensive summary report and had an initial
discussion of the possible structure and approach to developing the report
going forward.
Agreed 1:
In the longer term it was agreed that the Implementation Group should coordinate production of the report, including agreeing the questions and
validation process, and that the Group should simultaneously develop an
action plan setting out how the Programme would address the key issues
raised in the report over the year ahead. The Management Board would,
therefore, receive a combined report and action plan, which is based on
evaluation of information provided by local authorities, and includes a set of
priorities for the next period.
Action 1:
Jackie agreed to circulate the full report (evidence base) to the Group.
Noted 2:
The Group noted that progress was in line with key milestones within the
Programme Plan, but the report also highlighted a number of key issues
and challenges that have emerged from the evidence gathered from local
authorities.
Agreed 2:
The Group discussed what action the Implementation Group should take
and it was agreed that a brief, positive, statement should be developed that
reinforced and reminded practitioners of the aims and principles of CfE.
The statement would include:
i)
ii)
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
A definition of what is meant by a ‘broad general education’,
A description of what is expected at different stages
5
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
iii)
iv)
5.
Clarity about what would not be in line with the principles of CfE.
One or two of the key issues within the Progress Report.
Action 2:
Gill and Alan will take forward drafting of the statement and circulate
it to the Implementation Group for comment.
Agreed 3:
It was also agreed that the statement should be endorsed by both the CfE
Implementation Group and ADES Executive Group.
Action 3:
Terry and Ken offered to facilitate this and suggested that the
statement could be included within the business to be discussed at
the next ADES Executive Group meeting.
Agreed 4:
In the meantime, however, the Group proposed that more immediate action
should also be taken to engage directly with local authorities. It was
agreed that the statement from the Implementation Group (following
endorsement by ADES), should be used as the basis for early discussion
with local authorities and this would be taken forward by Education
Scotland’s District Inspectors and Area Advisers in the first instance.
Action 4:
Gill and Alan will brief Education Scotland’s District Inspectors and
Area Advisers accordingly.
Noted 3:
A full action plan and priorities for the coming year will be developed by the
Implementation Group and agreed at its next meeting in March. This
Action Plan will then go to the Management Board meeting on 29 March for
endorsement.
Action 5:
Gill and Alan will take forward development of the Action Plan and
ensure appropriate contribution and co-ordination with delivery
partners.
Noted 4:
The expectation is that the Implementation Group would then publish its
action plan / priorities for the next year shortly thereafter.
Current Hot Issues
This item was discussed fully in the context of the CfE Progress Report to Management Board
at Agenda Item 4 above.
Denise joined the meeting.
6.
Review of Communications and Engagement
Noted 1:
The Group noted all the work that had been taken forward by the Smarter
Scotland Group, but also recognised the opportunity to redefine the model
in the context of the Implementation Group. .
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
6
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
Noted 2:
The Group was very supportive of the move towards an overarching
Communications and Engagement Plan with more integrated and targeted
communications which would be designed to support the work of the
Implementation Group. However, it was also reassuring to note that
individual delivery partner communication plans would continue to exist
and there was recognition of the expertise, evidence and information
provided by partner organisations through their communications and
engagement with stakeholders.
Noted 3:
The process of developing the communications strategy and plan was
outlined to the Group, including a proposal to review / gather evidence of
the most effective channels of communication and a means of measuring
its effectiveness and impact. The Plan will also ensure that
communications are appropriately aligned with the Programme milestones
and prioritised in line with the work of the Implementation Group.
Noted 4:
A transition plan will be agreed to ensure smooth handover of
responsibilities from the Smarter Comms Group and also the current
Communications Plan.
Action 1:
Denise will develop a draft of the new Plan and Terms of Reference
for the Communications and Engagement Group which will be
brought to the next meeting of the Implementation Group.
Action 2:
Membership of the Communications Group will also be reviewed by
Denise to ensure appropriate representation, including possible
representation from Scotland’s Colleges.
Noted 5:
It was noted that ADES would not be represented on the Communications
Group, but that communications from the Implementation Group could be
disseminated through ADES communication channels.
ITEMS FOR NOTING
7.
Key Messages to Raise at Management Board – 19 January 2012
Agreed 1:
Following detailed discussion, the Group reached the view that four
issues, in particular, should be highlighted to the Management Board:
i)
Qualifications in S3 and the definition of Broad General Education.
ii)
P7 / S3 profiling and transition from Primary to Secondary.
iii)
Assessment and moderation – understanding of standards.
iv)
Transition from school to college and engagement between school /
college in the Senior Phase.
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
7
Min.01/12
CfE Implementation Group
Action 1:
Bill will discuss these points with the Management Board and
explain both the short and longer term action that is being proposed
by the Implementation Group.
8.
AOB
8.1
Publication of Agenda, Minute and Papers
9.
Agreed 1:
It was agreed that, once approved, the Minute from Implementation
Group meetings would be given to the Management Board. At each
Management Board Meeting, the Chair of the Implementation Group will
also report on the key business discussed at its meetings, highlighting
any emerging issues that require to be brought to the attention of the
Management Board.
Agreed 2:
The Minute and Agenda of Implementation Group meetings would then
be published on the website within the section for CfE Management
Board.
Agreed 3:
The Group also agreed that the final version of the Role, Remit and
Functions, should also be published on the website.
Proposed Agenda Items for Next Meeting
Agreed 1:
10.
The draft agenda was agreed, with an additional item proposed
on the college sector in relation to CfE current progress and
issues.
Date of Next Meeting
Noted 1:
The date of the next meeting was confirmed as Wednesday 21 March 2012
and will take place in Education Scotland’s offices at The Optima, Glasgow.
Agreed 1: It was agreed that all meetings will start at the earlier time of 9.30am.
Action 1: Catherine will arrange for the Calendar of Meetings to be updated and
reissued to members of the Implementation Group.
CfE Implementation Group
Friday 13 January 2012
8
Min.01/12